Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's a very fine line between valid public comment and inappropriate comment. The worst is when the person stands up and starts talking about something they have no clue about. Correcting them without embarrassing them is a fine art.
It's especially difficult when people get confused with numbers having more than four digits (more people than anyone wants to admit).
I don't know that he was "voted off" - maybe he chose not to run again?
It's a little surprising, on this forum, that there isn't support for parents using the appropriate legal channels who are pushing back on critical race theory being taught in their schools.
Therein lies the problem. The parents hear untrue crap on Fox News and take it to disrupt school board meetings.
Quote:
Teachers nationwide said K-12 schools are not requiring or pushing them to teach critical race theory, and most said they were opposed to adding the academic approach to their course instruction, according to a survey obtained by NBC News.
Status:
"This too shall pass. But possibly, like a kidney stone."
(set 20 days ago)
36,094 posts, read 18,370,367 times
Reputation: 51161
Quote:
Originally Posted by North Beach Person
It's a very fine line between valid public comment and inappropriate comment. The worst is when the person stands up and starts talking about something they have no clue about. Correcting them without embarrassing them is a fine art.
It's especially difficult when people get confused with numbers having more than four digits (more people than anyone wants to admit).
There was nothing that was said, at all, by the first 3 speakers in the OP video that was inappropriate or disrespectful, at all.
The public commentary portion of an open school board meeting isn't meant to be a "conversation" with the school board, unless the speaker wants it to be. The role of the school board is to listen, unless asked a question, and not interrupt, unless again as I said before the speaker brings up confidential information like specific student names.
The speaker has whatever time (often 3 minutes) of absolutely uninterrupted time, and that includes no interruptions from the audience.
The school board doesn't get to "correct" them unless it's on a point of fact, for example, that the bus routes for that neighborhood will not, in fact, change as was rumored. And that comment will come AFTER the speaker has finished speaking.
You did. The accurate history being taught is wrongly labeled CRT by fox news and their ilk.
From your link:
Quote:
Weingarten has already taken steps to distance her union from the divisive rhetoric, telling her members Tuesday that critical race theory isn’t taught in K-12 schools, but that “culture warriors are labeling any discussion of race, racism, or discrimination as CRT to try to make it toxic.”
Teachers want to teach accurate history and right-wingers want it hidden. Do right-winger support cancel culture or not? Make up your minds!
The following video is just one more video about school board members refusing to allow the public to express their views on Critical Race Theory. The video (about a school board meeting in Bucks County, PA) is pretty much "same old, same old" about people protesting schools teaching CRT and/or teaching very young children about sexuality -- I think many people are used to having their right to free speech suppressed, and especially with some school boards now.
However, this is the first video that I have seen that showed a written statute that would indicate to me that such suppression is actually illegal. QUOTE (this is at the 7:00 minute mark for those who don't want to listen to the "same old, same old"):
2014 Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes
Title 18 - CRIMES AND OFFENSES
Chapter 53 - Abuse of Office
Section 5301 - Official oppression
Universal Citation: 18 PA Cons. Satu 5301 (2014)
5301. Official oppression
A person acting or purporting to act in an official capacity or taking advantage of such actual or purported capacity commits a misdemeanor of the second degree if, knowing that his conduct is illegal, he:
(1) subjects another to arrest, detention, search, seizure, mistreatment, dispossession, assessment, lien or other infringement of personal or property rights; or
(2) denies or impedes another in the exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, power or immunity.
END QUOTE
NOTE: I bolded (2) above, but it was highlighted in the video.
So, as my understanding that freedom of speech is a RIGHT, wouldn't anyone in any official capacity in any state or jurisdiction with such a statute who tries to "shut people up" be guilty of violating such a statute?
Perhaps those who want to speak out against any school board -- or any official body -- who "shuts people down" for voicing their opinion should do some research ahead of time so as to be able to cite such statute that is in their state (if such a statute exists) so as to possibly set the stage to have such people arrested or fined. This is to prevent the possible defense that the official did NOT know that his conduct was illegal.
In my opinion, it is time to let these tyrants know that they do NOT have the law on their side. And, btw, why hasn't the ACLU become involved? It seems to me that such cases are exactly why the ACLU was founded! (But perhaps I am wrong about this?)
Status:
"This too shall pass. But possibly, like a kidney stone."
(set 20 days ago)
36,094 posts, read 18,370,367 times
Reputation: 51161
Well, lookit here. This is interesting. On the school board's website, their policy regarding public comment is under review, as of June 14, 2021.
It appears they're sticking with their policy that community members who say something irrelevant (which is what the 3 original speakers were accused of by the presiding officer) can be silenced BUT this policy allows for the present board members to overrule the presiding officer whether the content is objectionable.
You did. The accurate history being taught is wrongly labeled CRT by fox news and their ilk.
Teachers want to teach accurate history and right-wingers want it hidden. Do right-winger support cancel culture or not? Make up your minds!
!
CRT (or, to be exact, 'Critical Race Theory') was actually used in the headline from the link I gave. How could you have missed that -- or did you just ignore it? Here, I will repost it for you, and I will even bold and underline it for you.
Headline in above link: "Teachers’ Unions Vow to Defend Members in Critical Race Theory Fight"
To answer your question, however -- I have NO problem with accuratehistory being taught, and that even includes "revisionist" history if the history as previously taught was false and/or biased. And I do not like "cancel culture" in any form. I do, however, have a problem with opinions or philosophical theories being taught as FACT.
Last edited by katharsis; 07-07-2021 at 09:57 AM..
There was nothing that was said, at all, by the first 3 speakers in the OP video that was inappropriate or disrespectful, at all.
The public commentary portion of an open school board meeting isn't meant to be a "conversation" with the school board, unless the speaker wants it to be. The role of the school board is to listen, unless asked a question, and not interrupt, unless again as I said before the speaker brings up confidential information like specific student names.
The speaker has whatever time (often 3 minutes) of absolutely uninterrupted time, and that includes no interruptions from the audience.
The school board doesn't get to "correct" them unless it's on a point of fact, for example, that the bus routes for that neighborhood will not, in fact, change as was rumored. And that comment will come AFTER the speaker has finished speaking.
This is exactly how these 'listening' meetings should be held. As long as the public person is talking about a school matter of any kind, and talking respectfully, not shouting, etc, the board should remain quiet unless a question is asked. After the speaker is done board members can then make a comment (like "everything you said is irrelevant"), or any other claim in regard to what was spoken.
Status:
"This too shall pass. But possibly, like a kidney stone."
(set 20 days ago)
36,094 posts, read 18,370,367 times
Reputation: 51161
Quote:
Originally Posted by james112
This is exactly how these 'listening' meetings should be held. As long as the public person is talking about a school matter of any kind, and talking respectfully, not shouting, etc, the board should remain quiet unless a question is asked. After the speaker is done board members can then make a comment (like "everything you said is irrelevant"), or any other claim in regard to what was spoken.
I've attended a LOT of school board meetings, and have never heard a board member say anything close to "everything you said is irrelevant", though. They sit quietly, and listen, and only make very neutral points of fact after the speaker is done. OR, they might say we're interested in hearing further about the issue, can you please send me more information through the school board email?
And I've attended meetings that were so contentious that they hired armed cops. Rezoning neighborhoods. Man, does that ever get parents edgy.
This Pennsbury school board's behavior is so outside anything I've ever seen, it's actually shocking.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
